Of all the times Lou has curiously fired coaches out of the blue

There is no Brodeur in his prime. No HOF defensemen in Stevens and Niedermayer. No Rafalski. No A-line to wonder WTF is happening with this team.

If Lou fired Deboer, he should just fire himself. His coaching change worked once with Robinson.

It always amazes me that people will sh!t on the players and sh!t on the coach, but no one even questions the GM much.

There's a reason for that -- he's the farthest one from the ice and farthest from having an impact on the outcomes of games. There's a hierarchy of blame, and it is as follows:

1- Players. Players play, and coaches coach. A goalie lets in a weak goal? He shoulders the blame. A player takes a stupid penalty and that costs his team a goal and/or the game? It's on him

2- Coaches. So the players are playing well, but the decisions, strategy, formations, call-ups, etc do not make sense. That's on the coach. Not motivating his team? Also on him. Team choking when it matters or unable to hold leads? On him.

3- GM. The GM is third on the list because the only thing he can really be blamed for is bringing in the wrong coach or players, or spending money in the wrong places. The former is hard to prove right away because it takes players AND coaches a while to form chemistry, run their own system/style, and so forth. The latter doesn't happen that often unless you're Glen Sather -- most GMs, especially Lou, are pretty good at spending money on the right players.

4- Owner. Most owners are hands-off and just serve as bank accounts for the GMs to build and construct teams. We've had our share of screw ups in that department recently, as have other teams (i.e. the Lightning with those 2 clowns from the movie industry before Vinik took over who btw has just been a phenomenal owner), but other than that it's pretty easy to be an owner.

There's a reason for that -- he's the farthest one from the ice and farthest from having an impact on the outcomes of games. There's a hierarchy of blame, and it is as follows:

1- Players. Players play, and coaches coach. A goalie lets in a weak goal? He shoulders the blame. A player takes a stupid penalty and that costs his team a goal and/or the game? It's on him

2- Coaches. So the players are playing well, but the decisions, strategy, formations, call-ups, etc do not make sense. That's on the coach. Not motivating his team? Also on him. Team choking when it matters or unable to hold leads? On him.

3- GM. The GM is third on the list because the only thing he can really be blamed for is bringing in the wrong coach or players, or spending money in the wrong places. The former is hard to prove right away because it takes players AND coaches a while to form chemistry, run their own system/style, and so forth. The latter doesn't happen that often unless you're Glen Sather -- most GMs, especially Lou, are pretty good at spending money on the right players.

4- Owner. Most owners are hands-off and just serve as bank accounts for the GMs to build and construct teams. We've had our share of screw ups in that department recently, as have other teams (i.e. the Lightning with those 2 clowns from the movie industry before Vinik took over who btw has just been a phenomenal owner), but other than that it's pretty easy to be an owner.

Our players aren't that good, and Larsson's in Albany for Sal. That's on Lou. At least to some degree -- losing Zach and Kovy was bad luck/timing.

0

Sumus Legio
You don't turn this around in a couple shifts. Its going to take a little time, but I know the guys will come back. Because I can see it. -- Jacques Lemaire

Considering we're in good shape at 2 of 3 positions if we re-sign Schneids, and not in terrible shape with the cap, you don't know and neither does he. If we can't bring in a couple of high end forwards, we will suck. If we can, which is not beyond the realm of possibility, we won't.

look at the upcoming ufas, then if there's any we'd have to overpay big time, then look at our trades options, we have nothing plus most of our scorers will be gone in a few years so yeah...

It woudl be nice to hear an unbiased assessment of the team in the news. I mean - it's time to bash players who suck. Why does no one says Salvador sucks in the press? Why does no one call DeBoer out on Salvador. Not as in Why is larsson in Albany - that's easy to answer.

"Why is Salvador playing?" "He bring spit to the team" "no, no he actually doesn't"

"we're really happy with what he brings to the team" "Well it really doesn't translate to the on ice product Pete -- you shouldn't be happy"

Why does someone not say "Having Sal continually fake aches is not a good thing -- it's not a solution. Take the C away - it's the first step to admitting YOU ARE ON THE WRONG COURSE! YOU'RE VISION IS WRONG! Seriously. At least it sends a message that you understand that.

I mean -- if we want to make sure these guys know something isn't working why do we all only say Marty sucks? Marty getting aged is the least of this teams problems -- why is that the sole problem the press latches on to? It's not real.

look at the upcoming ufas, then if there's any we'd have to overpay big time, then look at our trades options, we have nothing plus most of our scorers will be gone in a few years so yeah...

We got Zach with a crappy pick. Elias was a second rounder. We got our pick back this year. I'm not saying we WILL get guys of that caliber, but I'm not willing to go all doom and gloom when we have good young d and will most likely have a good goalie hitting his prime. At worst, that keeps us in contention for a playoff spot every year. If we get a little lucky at forward, we're in good shape.

0

Sumus Legio
You don't turn this around in a couple shifts. Its going to take a little time, but I know the guys will come back. Because I can see it. -- Jacques Lemaire

It woudl be nice to hear an unbiased assessment of the team in the news. I mean - it's time to bash players who suck. Why does no one says Salvador sucks in the press? Why does no one call DeBoer out on Salvador. Not as in Why is larsson in Albany - that's easy to answer.

"Why is Salvador playing?" "He bring spit to the team" "no, no he actually doesn't"

"we're really happy with what he brings to the team" "Well it really doesn't translate to the on ice product Pete -- you shouldn't be happy"

Why does someone not say "Having Sal continually fake aches is not a good thing -- it's not a solution. Take the C away - it's the first step to admitting YOU ARE ON THE WRONG COURSE! YOU'RE VISION IS WRONG! Seriously. At least it sends a message that you understand that.

I mean -- if we want to make sure these guys know something isn't working why do we all only say Marty sucks? Marty getting aged is the least of this teams problems -- why is that the sole problem the press latches on to? It's not real.

Agreed. I like Sal, and am willing to believe he's a great locker room presence, but his on ice product is just sad. Seeing him play over Larsson would bother me even if I wasn't interested in Larsson's future. At this point, Sal isn't much better than Mike Mottau.

0

Sumus Legio
You don't turn this around in a couple shifts. Its going to take a little time, but I know the guys will come back. Because I can see it. -- Jacques Lemaire

Agreed. I like Sal, and am willing to believe he's a great locker room presence, but his on ice product is just sad. Seeing him play over Larsson would bother me even if I wasn't interested in Larsson's future. At this point, Sal isn't much better than Mike Mottau.

_________________________________________________________________
“They’re the ones that makes it happen,” Lemaire said. “It’s not us. It’s not me. It’s not the other guy. It’s not the guy before. It’s not the guy after. It’s them. And they have to take care of business.”
-
"I guess I just miss my friend" (#28)

I question some of Deboers personnel decisions and how he handles some situations, but otherwise he's a great motivator and has kept this mediocre team believing and playing hard. I absolutely think he should be kept.

As for Lou, he has his problems and makes his mistakes, but you'd be hard pressed to find another GM outside of Detroit who has kept a team as competitive as he has for as long as he has. He's done a lot through years of limited budgets back in the McMullen days and usually drafting in the last 10 picks of the first round. There will be a lot that changes for the better when he leaves, and a lot that may get worse as well.

0

Official NJDevs.com Keeper of Gory Corey Schwab, Mike Peluso, Troy Crowder, Jeff Frazee, and Rich Shulmistra."The Devils are that zombie that takes an ax to the skull, a bullet to the temple and is set on fire … and yet keeps lumbering along to the annoyance of all the other zombies." - Puck Daddy

I question some of Deboers personnel decisions and how he handles some situations, but otherwise he's a great motivator and has kept this mediocre team believing and playing hard. I absolutely think he should be kept.

As for Lou, he has his problems and makes his mistakes, but you'd be hard pressed to find another GM outside of Detroit who has kept a team as competitive as he has for as long as he has. He's done a lot through years of limited budgets back in the McMullen days and usually drafting in the last 10 picks of the first round. There will be a lot that changes for the better when he leaves, and a lot that may get worse as well.

just because this comes up somewhat often - this is a huge fallacy. The devils were always in the top 10-20% of the league in terms of salary. just because they weren't the rangers and didn't partake in the huge early UFA deals (guerin, tkachuk, hull, weight, etc) and because some of their guys left and got way overpaid it seemed like they were low budget. they were not.

if i have a criticism of lou, it's that he uses the "what i've seen done against us" theory too often on player acquisition and he can be slow to recognize a players downturn in their career. he is the opposite of branch rickey's mantra of dump a guy a year early than a year late.

_________________________________________________________________
“They’re the ones that makes it happen,” Lemaire said. “It’s not us. It’s not me. It’s not the other guy. It’s not the guy before. It’s not the guy after. It’s them. And they have to take care of business.”
-
"I guess I just miss my friend" (#28)

There will be a lot that changes for the better when he leaves, and a lot that may get worse as well.

I agree, but I am just not willing to deal with what gets worse. Lou has kept us afloat through our post-Cup years and in the playoffs most of the time - with a SCF run not too long ago. I like knowing that the Devils will at least be a half-decent team as long as someone named John MacLean is not behind the bench.

0

of No OneProud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)

"I am not an AH like you, he board is discussed with you/, good ;luck, AH" -BostonNala370

What Lou does this offseason with a bigger wallet offered to him will probably pave the way for the answer there. I'm of the opinion that DeBoer should stay though. Give him a slightly better roster and we're top 3 in our division, easy. I've felt this way all season.

I question some of Deboers personnel decisions and how he handles some situations, but otherwise he's a great motivator and has kept this mediocre team believing and playing hard. I absolutely think he should be kept.

As for Lou, he has his problems and makes his mistakes, but you'd be hard pressed to find another GM outside of Detroit who has kept a team as competitive as he has for as long as he has. He's done a lot through years of limited budgets back in the McMullen days and usually drafting in the last 10 picks of the first round. There will be a lot that changes for the better when he leaves, and a lot that may get worse as well.

In PDB's case, before I could think about canning him, I'd have to see what else is out there. Laviolette? He's got a solid record from a pure wins and losses standpoint, and led a team to a Cup, though the league was so screwed up in that first season back after the strike that I really don't make that much of that Cup win. I guess you can make an argument for giving Laviolette a shot, but I don't know how much of a difference he'd ultimately make. It would feel like change for change's sake. Like you say, the one thing you can say in PDB's defense is his team does TRY..they may not always look good doing it, but it does look like they're trying to me.

Re: Lou...the two main arguments you can make for him being fired are that maybe he's simply been here too long and now it's time for a change, and that a new GM coming in here without loyalties to any of the current players might be more willing to truly shake things up. The fact that some people do want him canned is actually a testament to how long this team has been competitive. Missing the playoffs in potentially three out of four seasons is a major shock to a lot of Devils fans' systems, and this is Lou's first real down period in over 25 years on the job. How many GMs last even 10 years in their positions, let alone 20+?

On one hand, you look at a guy who has Lou's insanely overall terrific track record and say "He should get a chance to turn this around." But I'd be lying through my teeth if I said I felt 100% confident that Lou can turn this around. I honestly don't know. It's going to take some serious creativity to change and improve this roster, especially since there's a fair number of forwards here that don't exactly have loads of trade value. I really hope Marty is not back next year...nothing against him, but I think his presence is becoming more overwhelming by the day, and not in a good way. If Lou brings him back, then I think he's truly stuck in the past. I've said that Lou keeping Marty around would be his equivalent to jumping the shark, and if that happens, I don't really know how much I can believe in him anymore.

I also can't say that the idea of the post-Lou Devils doesn't intrigue me. It does. It will be such upheaval...Jesus, for just about every Devil fan, Lou practically IS the Devils! As much as I can't imagine him not being the GM, I'm still curious about what his not being around could potentially mean. Better? Worse? I'm not as afraid or saddened by the idea of chance as I am curious.

So basically, I won't be angry if they're both back next season, but I won't be saddened if they're both gone either. Like Tom McVie once said when he asked about being an interim coach: "It's always on an interim basis." Same for GMs I guess. It's so weird to even think that Lou won't be here someday...I don't even really know how to process the idea.

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976, 21 March 2014 - 03:28 PM.

1

THE NHL MUST LOVE THE DEVILS - from who else? A RANGER fan![Mark Messier]: A big, bald attention whore with a stupid Easter Island-lookin face. - from who else? DaneykoIsGod!

Even when Marty comes back maybe Larry should put Clemmensen to be on the goal during the shootouts.Can the coach do that ? Switch the goalies 5 seconds to go in overtime? - Most priceless quote ever posted on a message board.

Martin Brodeur: THE MOST ALL-TIME WINS!, 12 straight seasons of 30+ wins, 3 Stanley Cups, 4 Vezina Trophies, and zero respect from too many so-called Devils "fans" who are either too young or too bandwagon to remember the much darker days of Sean Burke, Craig Billington, Bob Sauve, Alain Chevrier, and the talented but overwhelmed Chico Resch, among many others.

It's easy to support a great player when he's playing at his very best. It takes a true fan to support that same player during those rare moments and stretches when he's not. Babe Ruth went 0-4 some games, and sometimes Wayne Gretzky was held pointless. There may be such a thing as greatness, but no such thing as absolute perfection every single night.

#30 FOREVER!

20 out of 1,946 njdevs.com members agree: CR1976 is the Most Knowledgable Poster of 2008! Victory is mine...oh yes, victory is mine!

anyway im done talking about this. Absolutely I will ever change my opinion on that subject ever. There's no point

Lighten up. Make your point once. let people ponder it. No one will say "Hey, you know, I take it all back -- that fifteenth time you wrote that really made it all clear to me - I think it was that particular attitude you copped on that last one - you found my soft spot and I now agree with all you wrote this whole time. Thanks for sticking with me on this"

That honestly seems about all you'd be satisfied with. and I still don't buy you think there's no point to it. I think that's just another tac you're taking.

What gets me, is there's got to be something missing. No one sees a complete picture. The team is not balanced somehow.

It may be the new NHL -- but it feels like wildly successful parents with underachieving, though sweet and sincere children.

I cannot see the coach/player relationship. It's this barely contained acceptance. All of Salvador's convenient injuries rather actually having to accept public acknowledgement of his weakness? His being the Captain says so much. It's an acceptance of mediocrity. A lack of confidence and passion -- but a really nice guy. That is being held up as the Devils standard. It is.

I'm not Sal bashing - I'm saying this seems to epitomize this teams philosophy of nonsuccess. He is NOT the Devils system. It's like corruption of the concept of team play. it's not REAL. It's not looking for real success. It's hollow. It's a hollow empty act - It's like the cardboard Rockville in Blazing Saddles. The communication is very much the same way -- a very unsatisfying compromise -- a lose/lose set up. and the Marty/Cory thing is the same way - unsatisfying compromise - a lose/lose.

I feel awful being so negative on what might be an upswing. but --- we've been here before. Why pretend now it will be different because we're that much closer to the finish line? Now I'm so grumpy, I just drove my husband out of the room.

just because this comes up somewhat often - this is a huge fallacy. The devils were always in the top 10-20% of the league in terms of salary. just because they weren't the rangers and didn't partake in the huge early UFA deals (guerin, tkachuk, hull, weight, etc) and because some of their guys left and got way overpaid it seemed like they were low budget. they were not.

if i have a criticism of lou, it's that he uses the "what i've seen done against us" theory too often on player acquisition and he can be slow to recognize a players downturn in their career. he is the opposite of branch rickey's mantra of dump a guy a year early than a year late.

No, it's not, and no they weren't. They were a mid-budget team. Once McMullen left YankeeNets opened the coffers and the team spent more.

I imagine they were small budget when Lou was going through negotiations with Muller/Burke/etc. but as the team started winning playoff rounds consistently they got more cash to spend.

btw. They beat Gretzky and the Oilers in that game mentioned in the article. 4-2. Playing only 5 D for 60 minutes

0

^7^ is just defending his sport sheeps.. as Alcibiades the exiled Athenian rationalizes in his speech to the enemy Spartans, he wants to take revenge on Athens because he loves it and can't stand to see the state it's in now - Triumph